“Are we this backwards?”: Disbelief at town ditching 20mph speed limit…because most motorists ignore it; Police van blocks cycle lane for 36 hours…opposite traffic warden centre; Vine’s LTN dilemma; Should’ve gone to Specsavers + more on the live blog

58 thoughts on ““Are we this backwards?”: Disbelief at town ditching 20mph speed limit…because most motorists ignore it; Police van blocks cycle lane for 36 hours…opposite traffic warden centre; Vine’s LTN dilemma; Should’ve gone to Specsavers + more on the live blog”

1. Partially agree with the
   Partially agree with the limit being revised. It’s difficult not to spend a fair amount of time looking at the speedometer in a 20mph zone. I would rather a 30 zone but able to keep better eyes on the road.

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • Might be characterised as

     Might be characterised as more of a vehicle design issue problem though – if your speedo goes up to 180mph and increases in equal increments then the 0-20mph section is one sixth of the visual space. Would be quite easy to arrange a speedo with unequal increments in modern vehicles, if that’s not already the case.

     0——————–20——————40—————-60————–80————100———-120

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • Compact Corned Beef wrote:

       Might be characterised as more of a vehicle design issue problem though – if your speedo goes up to 180mph and increases in equal increments then the 0-20mph section is one sixth of the visual space. Would be quite easy to arrange a speedo with unequal increments in modern vehicles, if that’s not already the case.

       0——————–20——————40—————-60————–80————100———-120

       — Compact Corned Beef

       Cracking good idea! Why should a speedometer read in a linear manner? For road safety slow speeds are far more important to observe so should be easier to read. Conversely, high speeds (>70mph) are pretty useless. In most locations and circumstances such speeds are illegal and the presence of precise scaling only serves to encourage boy racers.

        

       PS, just Googled non-linear speedometer. Apparently they are a thing with VW!

       https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/technical-stuff/149071-about-non-linear-speedometers.html

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • All VW group cars! My Skoda

         All VW group cars! My Skoda has one, it uses smaller increments up to 80mph (I assume it’s actually up to 130km/h for continental limits), then halves them above that. 

         Log In or Register to post comments

     • The problem with modern cars
       @Corned Beef – The problem with modern cars is that they’re so refined with sound insulation and absence of vibrations, that it’s difficult to do 20mph without the aid of technology (eg manual speed limiter). It’s less of a problem in an enthusiasts car (eg MX5, Caterham, Elise etc). It also partly explains why I turned from being a full on motoring enthusiast into a cyclist, bikes are just way more fun than a modern, run of the mill car. Massive sensation of speed, fun in the corners and a real connection with your surroundings.

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • RedRocket wrote:

         @Corned Beef – The problem with modern cars is that they’re so refined with sound insulation and absence of vibrations, that it’s difficult to do 20mph without the aid of technology (eg manual speed limiter). It’s less of a problem in an enthusiasts car (eg MX5, Caterham, Elise etc). It also partly explains why I turned from being a full on motoring enthusiast into a cyclist, bikes are just way more fun than a modern, run of the mill car. Massive sensation of speed, fun in the corners and a real connection with your surroundings.

         — RedRocket

         Yep – agreed. Years ago, I bought a Mazda RX-8 and they threw in a day’s driving experience with it. Half a day on the track, and half a day road driving skills. The latter half was pretty good on safety issues. They made the point about how much less sensation of speed you get in today’s (and this was mid-2000s) cars compared with the past. Their advice – drive in a low gear.

         Log In or Register to post comments

         • Steve K wrote:

           … Their advice – drive in a low gear.

           — Steve K

           Interesting, as modern cars frequently suggest the driver should use a higher gear, to the point where the engine can struggle to maintain speed going uphill.

   • I find it a doddle, drive

     I find it a doddle, drive with the aim af creating a queue. That’s you doing 20.  And oh so satisfying.

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • definitely.  I come to a

       definitely.  I come to a 20mph zone, set my speed limiter to 20mph and revel in the number of frustrated cars that sit behind me.

       However, more alarmingly there are a growing number of cars that will overtake me when I do this…. even outside schools

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • I do it in pretty much all

         I do it in pretty much all 30s too 🙂

          

         Log In or Register to post comments

   • RedRocket wrote:

     Partially agree with the limit being revised. It’s difficult not to spend a fair amount of time looking at the speedometer in a 20mph zone.

     — RedRocket

     But not at 30, 40, 50, 60 or 70?

     Log In or Register to post comments

   • RedRocket wrote:

     Partially agree with the limit being revised. It’s difficult not to spend a fair amount of time looking at the speedometer in a 20mph zone.

     — RedRocket

     It certainly is if you’re not used to doing it.  However, if you practise driving within the limits, it becomes easier to know the sound of the engine and to know when you are exceeding the limit.

     It also helps to be in a lower gear rather than a ‘cruising gear’ so the engine tone is slightly more noticeable. In a 20mph zone, that won’t make a significant dent in economy, since you will be slowing for junctions on a regular basis anyway.  But it will both allow the driver to be more conscious of speed, and help more reactive slowing from engine braking.  And it won’t be for long, because people don’t – or shouldn’t – be driving in a 20mph zone for extended periods of time normally.  If they are, they should be walking or cycling or picking a different route.

     If you don’t know how to drive at 20 mph safely, you really should not be driving.  It’s not a justification, excuse, or even a reasonable explanation.

     Log In or Register to post comments

   • Doesn’t the constant beeping

     Doesn’t the constant beeping from the sat nav give you a clue?

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • Bungle_52 wrote:

       Doesn’t the constant beeping from the sat nav give you a clue?

       — Bungle_52

       This reminds me of the after-dinner talk from an air traffic controller and former pilot, “What Goes Up Might Come Down” (David Gunson… do your own search).  

       “In the cockpit there are lots of red warning lights which flash and a klaxon which sounds to indicate that we have over-cooked.
       And we will switch those off!
       There’s nothing more disconcerting when you’re panicking than to have red lights and a klaxon going off.”

       Slightly different reason in a car leading to the same thing.  When you don’t give a [beep], there’s no reason why your equipment should either!  So we will switch that off!

       Log In or Register to post comments

   • RedRocket wrote:

     Partially agree with the limit being revised. It’s difficult not to spend a fair amount of time looking at the speedometer in a 20mph zone. I would rather a 30 zone but able to keep better eyes on the road.

     — RedRocket

     Which does nothing to address why the 20mph limit in the first place, which is that hitting a pedestrian at 20 is significantly less likely to be fatal. 

     Also … cruise control is great for maintaining a speed below the limit without having to constantly check the speedo. 

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • Jetmans Dad wrote:

       Partially agree with the limit being revised. It’s difficult not to spend a fair amount of time looking at the speedometer in a 20mph zone. I would rather a 30 zone but able to keep better eyes on the road.

       — Jetmans Dad

       Which does nothing to address why the 20mph limit in the first place, which is that hitting a pedestrian at 20 is significantly less likely to be fatal. 

       Also … cruise control is great for maintaining a speed below the limit without having to constantly check the speedo. — RedRocket

       My car’s cruise control doesn’t work below about 27 mph.  Outside of 20 limits it great, I drive with my foot over the brake pedal most of the time – if I leave sufficient space, I can generally adjust my speed if necessary just using the cruise control buttons on the steering column. But even with it being a hybrid and generally in electric mode at 20mph, it really isn’t difficult to maintain 20mph – it just takes practice, and most drivers are not at all practiced at obeying 20mph limits.

       Log In or Register to post comments

2. Easy to drive at 20mph, after
   Easy to drive at 20mph, after a while checking the speed isn’t as necessary. It’s as natural as 30mph, the thing is you have to make an effort to start with ; just like driving at any other speed.

   Log In or Register to post comments

3. As usual Vine talking

   As usual Vine talking complete and utter garbage – his video is of a pedestrianised zone, not an LTN.

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • Well, as he prefaced his

     Well, as he prefaced his statement with “Genuine question”, and then included the phrase “looks like” a LTN, he is not saying it is a LTN but rather sincerely asking what it is, and what the rules are, because it is genuinely unclear. In addition, there is (as far as I know) no technical or legal definition of what a LTN is. Also, it appears that it isn’t a purely pedestrianised area, because cyclists would be allowed to ride through it.

      

     I think you are being rather harsh here.

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • The clue is in the sign that

       The clue is in the gigantic sign that says “Pedestrian zone Thurs-Sat 11am-10pm”.

       Btw – interesting to see the Lib Dems in Ealing welcoming the removal of LTNs https://twitter.com/CllrGaryMalcolm/status/1395690032661417988, arguing on exactly the same lines I did originally on it benefitting the wealthy and powerful (people like Jeremy Vine) over the vulnerable.

       Along with the Labour MP of Ealing is shows there is a broad political coalition against these undemocratic measures, which suggests their enduring unpopularity.

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • It’s no motorised vehicles

         It’s no motorised vehicles plus there is a deliberate bike sized gap left hence the question.

         Log In or Register to post comments

       • And yet he received a

         And yet he received a response (from Surrey Police) to confirm that the signage used only prohibited motor vehicles and cycling was absolutely permitted. 

         Always good to ask questions when you are not sure. 

         Log In or Register to post comments

       • Pedestrian Zone does not

         Pedestrian Zone does not neccesarily mean no bikes as lots of Pedestrian Zones allow cyclists. And the sign below just states no Motor vehicles between those times. So no, the sign does not make it clear without further signage.

         As for the letter, he states vulnerable and people who need their vehicles for their liveliehoods, but can he or you answer what does that mean? No vehicles are banned from LTN’s. They just might have to go slightly further afield to access / exit them? And who is vunerable? Are children classed as vulnerable in that scenario? Is his argument for Vulnerable people inside the LTN in which case are they Vulnerable or are they weathy and powerful? Surely it can’t be both in your claims.

         Edit as you edited yours with the additional comment below.
         Along with the Labour MP of Ealing is shows there is a broad political coalition against these undemocratic measures, which suggests their enduring unpopularity.

         Yes, there were none at all before Covid……

         Log In or Register to post comments

         • You’ve missed my point, which

           You’ve missed my point, which was that – regardless of the status of the pedestrian zone vis-a-vis cycling – it is not an LTN.

           An LTN is a “low traffic neighbourhood”, where motorized vehicles are free to travel provided they enter from the correct location, and this is completely different. Vine is (deliberately and cynically) trying to conflate deeply unpopular LTNs with pedestrianised areas, as the latter are a sensible and widely accepted way to segregate heavy footfall areas from motorised vehicles.

           On LTNs generally, again you’ve missed my point. According to you, other commentators, Road.cc and campaigning activists (who sometimes pretend to be academics) they are wildly popular with the general public. Yet politicians of all colours are united in their condemnation of them and would like them removed. Now, as the saying goes, “If something doesn’t make sense it probably isn’t true”, which suggests to me that they are in fact deeply unpopular.

           To answer your question directly on LTNs, the argument that they displace traffic from affluent areas to poorer ones is well trodden and in my view proven beyond doubt. The pollution and congestion that poor people suffer for these vanity schemes is unacceptable. 

           Additionally, for people of limited resources time is money. That money might need to be spent on providing clothes and food for their children or keeping a roof over their head. Perhaps you have the financial means to saunter around wasting time all day, but many don’t have that luxury and these LTNs add to financial stress and worry.

           So to conclude, as the Lib Dem councillor correctly pointed out, LTNs are regressive in the sense that they protect the wealthy who live within them at the detriment of those who suffer doubly from pollution and congestion.

         • “Additionally, for people of

           “Additionally, for people of limited resources time is money.”

           How much real cash do these people get then if they save 30 minutes a day ? Are they all wfh doing piece work ?

            

           As to the demographics – https://road.cc/content/news/london-ltns-not-mainly-affluent-areas-researchers-find-281323

            

         • hirsute wrote:

           As to the demographics – https://road.cc/content/news/london-ltns-not-mainly-affluent-areas-researchers-find-281323

           — hirsute

           You’ve fallen into the trap of citing the non-peer reviewed research of a former polytechnic’s cycling campaigner as fact, vs the real world experience of the vulnerable victims of LTNs. Having a very brief glance at the paper the author would appear to have ignored the fact that LTNs have been implemented mainly in poorer boroughs, therefore skewing the figures and producing bias in her “equality analysis” to window dress and downplay the underlying inequalities behind LTNs.

           You don’t need to data mine or manipulate out-of-date census figures to work out that LTNs push traffic from leafier sideroads on to main roads. That is just simple common sense looking at the aims and locations of LTNs. Who lives on already-polluted and congested main roads, who bear the brunt of the increased traffic spawned by LTNs? Poor people.

         • Nigel Garrage wrote:

           You don’t need to data mine or manipulate out-of-date census figures to work out that LTNs push traffic from leafier sideroads on to main roads. 

           — Nigel Garrage

           I always thought main rides were the desired location for through traffic rather than mainly residential side roads, it is only sat nav and apps looking to shave minutes off of journeys that have diverted traffic from intended through roads onto local roads in the first place.

            

         • I think it is you who has
           I think it is you who has fallen into the trap of assuming main roads are lined with housing for the poor. Most main routes into cities have bigger houses, built before the rise of motorised transport. It was a safer area away from the back street crowded slums. Purpose built workers’ housing is generally built to the sides without through-routes.

         • Wardy74 wrote:

           Most main routes into cities have bigger houses, built before the rise of motorised transport.

           — Wardy74

           Something similar is still happening but for different reasons. Housebuilding companies developing an estate put larger detached houses on the outside (or around the entry junction) so that it looks more impressive and ‘gives a more upmarket impression’ if you’re looking from the road.

           “Road.cc and campaigning activists (who sometimes pretend to be academics)”

           

           ” the real world experience of the vulnerable victims of LTNs.”

           Yeah, it’s pure evil. Apartheid in action, typical of commie councils run by self-important Derek Hatton wannabes. All those oppressive councils installing LTNs are ruining poor people’s lives, they are prisoners in their own homes. They don’t even get to inhale the same toxic smog as those on main routes. How unfair! (which is comical if you consider how unfairly this government has treated disabled people, EU nationals, refugees, those in the gig economy and on zero-hours contracts and many more).

         • Nigel Garrage wrote:

           You don’t need to data mine or manipulate out-of-date census figures to work out that LTNs push traffic from leafier sideroads on to main roads. That is just simple common sense looking at the aims and locations of LTNs. Who lives on already-polluted and congested main roads, who bear the brunt of the increased traffic spawned by LTNs? Poor people.

           — Nigel Garrage

           Sat Nav and Google pushed traffic from main roads onto to poorer side streets. This is the real ‘displaced’ traffic of the last 15-20 years. Come and visit Walworth and see the ‘leafier’ side streets that are your common sense locations. LTNs are overwhelmingly popular – you’ve fallen for the trap of believing those who shout the loudest.

         • markieteeee wrote:

           You don’t need to data mine or manipulate out-of-date census figures to work out that LTNs push traffic from leafier sideroads on to main roads. That is just simple common sense looking at the aims and locations of LTNs. Who lives on already-polluted and congested main roads, who bear the brunt of the increased traffic spawned by LTNs? Poor people.

           — markieteeee

           Sat Nav and Google pushed traffic from main roads onto to poorer side streets. This is the real ‘displaced’ traffic of the last 15-20 years. Come and visit Walworth and see the ‘leafier’ side streets that are your common sense locations. LTNs are overwhelmingly popular – you’ve fallen for the trap of believing those who shout the loudest.

           — Nigel Garrage

           and in moving traffic into the side roads, freed up capacity on the main roads which was quickly taken up by addiitonal cars.

           Car use increases quickest where capacity is available and much slower where congestion already exists, almost as if driving being made eaiser encourages more people to drive.

           It is not possible to provide enough capacity for all roads to be free of traffic, allowing residential roads to turn into through routes just makes all roads to be equally congested.

         • Seems you are relying on

           Seems you are relying on anecdotes. Why do you think main road = poor and why do you think these people are poor? Or do you mean comparatively lower pay?

           Still waiting to hear about time is money and why Vine was correct to ask his question.

            

            

         • It’s definitely not the case

           It’s definitely not the case in London. Data shows there is no demographic difference between the main roads and side streets in neighbourhoods in the capital.  I’m sure there are exceptions to this but it’s not the case where the LTNs I pass through are.

         • You may have missed the point

           You may have missed the point that rich people actually live in de facto LTNs – IE leafy outer London boroughs/cul de sacs etc. The whole point of this exercise is to redress the balance following the advent of sat navs that drive through traffic through residential urban areas.

           Poor people in urban areas deserve to not have through traffic thundering through their neighbourhood. LTNs are actually addressing a great imbalance in favour of poor urban people. 

         • “Deeply unpopular LTNs”.
           “Deeply unpopular LTNs”. Usual bollocks from you. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2020/oct/22/despite-a-loud-opposing-minority-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-are-increasingly-popular?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

       • I look forward to road.cc
         I look forward to road.cc running a story about this nefarious Liberal Democrat and his anti-LTN agenda…

         Log In or Register to post comments

   • Nigel Garrage wrote:

     As usual Vine talking complete and utter garbage

     — Nigel Garrage

     While I’m sure we all appreciate your contributions, it may be worth posting in a more conciliatory, balanced tone; for example, starting with, “I don’t know what I’m talking about but…”.

     Log In or Register to post comments

   • Nigel Garrage wrote:

     As usual Vine talking complete and utter garbage – his video is of a pedestrianised zone, not an LTN.

     — Nigel Garrage

     Still not up to Socrapicyclist’s standards; far too blunt and obvious.

     Log In or Register to post comments

   • Every time JV opens his gob,

     Every time JV opens his gob, shite spews out of it. I used to like him on the radio but now he is just going out of his way to be confrontational. He’s a twat.

     Log In or Register to post comments

4. I’m looking forward to the

   I’m looking forward to the mandatory implementation of speed limiters for new cars from next year.  Lets hope the bypass mechanisms aren’t too frequently used.  If Markinch keeps its 20mph limit an increasing number of vehices will comply.

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • Mary Willoughby wrote:

     I’m looking forward to the mandatory implementation of speed limiters for new cars from next year.

     — Mary Willoughby

     Tell me more.

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • As of next year (not sure of

       As of next year (not sure of the date), intelligent speed assist (ISA) will be need to be installed on all new cars. ISA uses either GPS or cameras to identify the speed limit. It first alerts the driver that they are exceeding the speed limit and then slows the vehicle.

       ISA can (currently) be overriden or disabled completely. However, I think it is a good step in the right direction – it can currently be disabled, but the law may change in future, likewise, motor insurers might incorporate it with black box technology and charge motorists more if they regularly disable or override it.  If someone is involved in a collision where speed is a factor, and it can be shown they have disabled or overridden ISA they may suffer enjoy (slightly) less lenient sentencing.

       Log In or Register to post comments

5. I’ve never really understood

   I’ve never really understood why the “No Vehicles” sign exists, can’t think of any circumstances where you couldn’t use a “No Entry” sign instead.

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • Tom_77 wrote:

     I’ve never really understood why the “No Vehicles” sign exists, can’t think of any circumstances where you couldn’t use a “No Entry” sign instead.

     — Tom_77

     Because “No vehicles” means “no vehicles”. “No entry” just means they can’t go in that way.

     Log In or Register to post comments

   • My impression is that No

     My impression is that No Entry typically designates a one-way street (no vehicles may enter but vehicles are permitted to be on that bit of road) while No Vehicles marks a segment of road where vehicles are not permitted to be.

     In some cases, the No Vehicles prohibition applies to only a very narrow section which can look very similar to No Entry (e.g. a modal filter in a LTN – motor vehicles may be allowed on either side of the planter, but there is a very narrow section from one side to the other in which they are entirely prohibited).

     Log In or Register to post comments

   • As others have said, no entry

     As others have said, no entry just means that and doesn’t implicitely ban vehicles from entering along it elsewhere. If you had said Road Closed signs it might have been different but I think they are only ever temporary. That said, I wonder how many no vehicles signs are in use across the country. 

     Log In or Register to post comments

6. When did the police start
   When did the police start adding those cyclists beware stickers to their vans?

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • Ever since wjts submitted

     Ever since wtjs submitted loads of complaints to lancs police?

      

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • Ever since wtjs submitted

       Ever since wtjs submitted loads of complaints to lancs police?

       Fame at last! However, I have achieved no points on anyone’s licence yet. I’m hoping there will be loads to come starting with LC’s first close-passing prosecution next month, followed by an absolute deluge of supposed prosecutions for red light crashing offences. However, I’m still aware that LC may have dodges up its collective sleeve to enable the offenders to get away with joke penalties.

       Log In or Register to post comments

   • When they decided parking in

     When they decided parking in cycle lanes comes under the remit of being on duty.

     Log In or Register to post comments

7. Trouble in cyclists’ paradise

   Trouble in cyclists’ paradise: Amsterdam accused of favouring pedestrians

   https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/21/trouble-cyclists-paradise-amsterdam-accused-favouring-pedestrians

   A series of developments have led the Amsterdam branch of the Fietsersbond, the Dutch cyclists’ union, to claim the municipality has turned on them, unfairly prioritising pedestrians in the city’s historic centre.

   Where once the cyclist was king, free to weave around the small roads of the centrum with abandon, it is claimed there has been a discernible change of attitude. At best cyclists are being treated as “guests” in the heart of the city, at worst as intruders to be expelled to outer lanes, it is suggested.

   Log In or Register to post comments

8. From April 2023, the Welsh

   From April 2023, the Welsh Government is going to make 20mph the default speed limit in residential areas.

   How it will be enforced of course is a different matter but it is heading in the right direction.
    

   Log In or Register to post comments

9. We’ve had a number of visits

   We’ve had a number of visits to UK from Australia and one of our biggest problems while driving was to find out what the speed limits were. There was rarely any indication of what it was! It was almost as though they were a state secret. In the end we relied on our navigation app to let us know know what it was where we were which is not really satisfactory. 

   Maybe if you had better speed limit signage it would help to reinforce the speed limits instead of keeping them a secret! 🙂 

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • Speed limit changes are
     Speed limit changes are always signed and there should be small repeaters.
     Around towns it is 30 unless otherwise indicated.
     Not sure if motorways are specifically sign posted but if the speed is not a maximum of 70, then it will be signed.
     Perhaps you were out in very rural areas where there can be few signs although if you follow ‘stop in the distance you can see’ you will be fine.

     Log In or Register to post comments

   • dabba wrote:

     Maybe if you had better speed limit signage it would help to reinforce the speed limits instead of keeping them a secret! 🙂

     — dabba

     Perhaps you should have gone to Specsavers.

     Dual carriageways and motorways generally 70mph. Other roads = 60mph. Built-up areas = 30 or 40mph.

     Speed limits are clearly signed everywhere, as hirsuite has mentioned. The real problem is compliance – if drivers obeyed the limit then everyone behind them would be obliged to do the same.

     There are a number of vehicle activated LED warning signs on my route to and from work and they’re activated an awful lot. That’s solely because drivers – the vast majority of whom drive those roads daily – refuse to obey the law.

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • “if drivers obeyed the limit

       “if drivers obeyed the limit then everyone behind them would be obliged to do the same.”

       That’s right. And most people aren’t that selfish.

       “That’s solely because drivers – the vast majority of whom drive those roads daily – refuse to obey the law.”

       Yes, obviously. Why do you think they might do that?

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • Dave Dave wrote:

         “if drivers obeyed the limit then everyone behind them would be obliged to do the same.”

         That’s right. And most people aren’t that selfish.

         “That’s solely because drivers – the vast majority of whom drive those roads daily – refuse to obey the law.”

         Yes, obviously. Why do you think they might do that?

         — Dave Dave

         I know! I know! Is it because they’re selfish entitled twunts who think the rules don’t apply to them? 😉

         Log In or Register to post comments

       • Are you soctwaticyclist
         Are you soctwaticyclist reborn ?

         Log In or Register to post comments